"10. When a government spends, its citizens eventually pay, either today or
tomorrow, either through explicit taxes or implicit ones like inflation."
This is false. It declares that government is incapable of creating value in excess of its investment, which only a perverse ideologue could believe. It would be equally absurd to substitue "corporation" for "government", or to conversely assert that groups always suffer from the actions of individuals.
It's not clear to me what the policy is on links to copyright violating offers, e.g., "jQuery: Novice to Ninja: New Kicks and Tricks - SitePoint". SitePoint.com is currently asking $29 for that eBook, and graciously appears not to be applying DRM. Unfortunately, the phrase "really free" in CONTRIBUTING.md does not really resolve the question.
My son's iPhone physically (and probably electrically) fits a USB, but the phone requires that it receive some Apple only signal from the charger, or it refuses to charge. It's one of the reasons his phone is often dead. The regulators need to kill this kind of hostile behavior.
With a graphical browser, the images-of-text are ideograms I (ignorant westerner) do not understand, so the experience is the same. That's probably intended as humor.
I would think the question is the other way around.
It's a step (possibly a small one) to diluting the DEM monolith that his California.
Today CA can be depended to field a DEM slate of senators, and send DEM electors to the electoral college [1]. If broken up, then some of the new senators would presumably go GOP, as would some of the electoral votes.
It would be fascinating to see the outcome of such a plan. The results would be interesting from poli sci, economics, and sociology perspectives.
[1] Is CA an all-or-nothing state, or is it proportional? I don't recall.
Playing the long game, if the split was right, yep they would because then California could not pull some of the stunts it has in the past[1]. Textbook companies are another area that would change because of split CA.
Take the two top states (purple & blue) and make them vertical (one coastal, one inland) as opposed to horizontal. That would probably be enough to tip the scales.
I do think it might be a problem for Democrats in the first place because CA would no longer be an electoral fortress. Much like the plan to split NYC and surrounding counties from NY state.
I am more interested in water policy once a split occurs. I would imagine some desalination plants would finally be built.
Hm, Wikipedia says "California has also begun producing a small amount of desalinated water, water that was once sea water, but has been purified." That may need a "citation needed", at least - at a skim I'm not seeing support for it.
Hum, maybe they meant some testing devices, I guess that would be "small amount". Cannot imagine you'd build a whole plant without some miniature tests.
Tell them it will make it so the liberal hippies they currently share a state with will end up in another state and they'll be free to oppress any group they feel like.
By "manually", I assume we include self-generated software assists? I have a spreadsheet that is specific to my circumstances, and which I modify (quite lightly) each year according to changes in the instructions and circumstances (e.g., children age out of dependent status).
Even (especially?) geniuses compartmentalize. I applaud life saving and misery reduction regardless of who does it, and I'm not going to make my approval contingent on an apology for past wrongs.
The Gates foundation seems to be doing the best they can to model as far into the future as feasible so as to make best use of their resources. Models that propose death and misery as their means are rightly viewed with skepticism.
